Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Sun, 29 Mar 2020 00:40:57 +0100
From:   Pali =?utf-8?B?Um9ow6Fy?= <pali@kernel.org>
To:     Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@samsung.com>,
        Sungjong Seo <sj1557.seo@samsung.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] exfat: Simplify exfat_utf8_d_hash() for code points
 above U+FFFF
Message-ID: <20200328234057.dh23w255eaag2glg@pali>
References: <20200317222555.29974-1-pali@kernel.org>
 <20200317222555.29974-2-pali@kernel.org>
 <20200318000925.GB23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20200318093251.bgxd3l5om4zlm3br@pali>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20200318093251.bgxd3l5om4zlm3br@pali>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wednesday 18 March 2020 10:32:51 Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 March 2020 00:09:25 Al Viro wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 11:25:52PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > Function partial_name_hash() takes long type value into which can be stored
> > > one Unicode code point. Therefore conversion from UTF-32 to UTF-16 is not
> > > needed.
> > 
> > Hmm...  You might want to update the comment in stringhash.h...
> 
> Well, initially I have not looked at hashing functions deeply. Used
> hashing function in stringhash.h is defined as:
> 
> static inline unsigned long
> partial_name_hash(unsigned long c, unsigned long prevhash)
> {
> 	return (prevhash + (c << 4) + (c >> 4)) * 11;
> }
> 
> I guess it was designed for 8bit types, not for long (64bit types) and
> I'm not sure how effective it is even for 16bit types for which it is
> already used.
> 
> So question is, what should we do for either 21bit number (one Unicode
> code point = equivalent of UTF-32) or for sequence of 16bit numbers
> (UTF-16)?
> 
> Any opinion?

So what to do with that hashing function?

Anyway, "[PATCH 4/4] exfat: Fix discard support" should be reviewed as
currently discard support in exfat is broken.